The recent UK Court of Appeal decision regarding Emotional Perception’s patent application represents a key moment in the legal treatment of AI innovations. The Court overturned a prior High Court ruling, solidifying the stance that AI inventions such as artificial neural networks (ANNs) are fundamentally computer programs and therefore excluded from patentability.
Key Judgments
The Court’s decision clarified several important points, as detailed in an article from Mathys & Squire LLP:
- A computer is defined as “a machine which processes information”.
- A computer program is considered “a set of instructions for a computer to do something”, specifically “to process information in a particular way”.
- An artificial neural network (ANN), regardless of its implementation (in hardware or software), is classified as a computer.
- The weights and biases within an ANN, irrespective of implementation, are identified as a computer program.
- The sending of an improved recommendation is not deemed a technical effect because its impact is subjective and cognitive, not technical. This aligns with the European Patent Office’s (EPO) approach.
As a result, Emotional Perception’s invention was excluded from patentability on the grounds of essentially being a computer program.
Increased Alignment Between UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) and EPO
This decision reinforces the consistency between UKIPO’s and the EPO’s approaches to AI patentability. Both institutions maintain that for an AI invention to be patentable, it must exhibit a technical effect beyond computer implementation. The subjective nature of AI processes, such as emotional perception, does not satisfy this requirement.
Impact on AI Innovations
Following this ruling, UKIPO has suspended its guidance on AI-related patent applications, pending further clarification. This suspension indicates the significance of the ruling and its potential impact on the future handling of AI patents in the UK. Companies working on AI innovations must now carefully consider how their technologies align with these legal standards to ensure robust intellectual property protection.
Strategic Considerations for Companies
For companies like Emotional Perception and others, this ruling will trigger a reevaluation of their intellectual property (IP) strategies. The decision underscores the importance of demonstrating a clear technical effect when seeking patent protection for AI technologies. Firms may need to also look beyond traditional patent routes and consider alternative IP strategies, such as trade secrets, enabled publications, or copyright, to safeguard their innovations, if they believe their AI innovations cannot pass the patentability test.
What this means for AI Patentability
The Court of Appeal’s decision on Emotional Perception’s patent application (if it is not challenged further) marks a significant development in AI patentability. By reinforcing that AI inventions must demonstrate a technical effect beyond computer implementation, the ruling sets a precedent for future AI patent applications. Companies must now adapt their strategies to navigate this evolving landscape effectively.
Contact ipCapital Group if you would like some assistance with your AI patent strategy and how best to protect your most valuable innovations.
For further details and insights, refer to the original articles from GJE and Mathys & Squire LLP.